Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+FT8\s+\-\s+How\s+it\s+really\s+works\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:28:28 -0600
While sitting around being bored and recovering from a gall bladder operation, I decided to do some experiments with FT8. First thing I did was upgrade the software to WSJT-X v2.0. I hope this post d
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00194.html (14,511 bytes)

2. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 20:27:58 -0500
No, that is a correct statement. Signal reports in WSJT-X for FT8, JT65 and JT9 are *all* measured *with regard to the noise in 2500 Hz*. Note that the tone filters in WSJT-X are on the order of less
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00195.html (16,874 bytes)

3. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 20:57:51 -0600
Joe, thanks for the information. I am not exactly sure what all that means. My conclusions were based on observed data. It seems pretty obvious to me that a signal that is more than 50 dB above the n
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00196.html (18,005 bytes)

4. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 22:57:24 -0500
Is the definition of "noise floor" being changed for FT8? WSJT-X (and WSJT before that) defines noise as the integrated value of noise (noise power) across the 2500 Hz (approximately based on the rec
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00197.html (19,359 bytes)

5. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:08:21 -0600
That would be my definition of noise power also. That would not help explain the numbers produced by FT8. It's curious that my VFO1 - VFO2 measurement produces numbers very close to what FT8 reports.
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00198.html (20,126 bytes)

6. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: ly2ij@qrz.lt
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:29:57 +0200
HI, Thanks for sharing experience! Question to FT8 and "noise" relations - In usual case everything in passband is noise except signal of interest. So with only one FT8 signal and white noise in pass
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00201.html (8,305 bytes)

7. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 10:45:32 -0600
Thanks to the folks commenting on how FT8 works. That was what I originally thought might be a possibility because that would result in a real S/N number. However that doesn't seem to be the case. Th
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00202.html (10,242 bytes)

8. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 12:57:40 -0500
That is only true if you leave AGC enabled and the strong signals result in the AGC decreasing the overall sensitivity. The WSJT-X Users Guide (instructions) recommend turning off AGC. It is possible
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00204.html (12,883 bytes)

9. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Patrik Hrvatin <pa3k@vip.hr>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:11:47 +0100
Hi,Narroving filter in WSJT-X digi modes will degrade decodes! Best performance you'll get using wide open filters on you radio.I sugest you to look at the WSJT-X archives and find the answer to your
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00206.html (8,693 bytes)

10. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Martin <dm4im@t-online.de>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 20:45:20 +0100
Correct me if im wrong: A K3 owner could easily check this. You need 2 computers, running WSJT on both. Don't know if you can run 2 instances of WSJT on a single computer. Feed the left channel from
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00207.html (8,644 bytes)

11. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: jon jones <n0jk@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 20:10:10 +0000
Jerry: Clever way to evaluate FT8 SNR reports with your VFO 1 and 2 comparisons. I often see positive numbers on FT8 160 meter signal reports for strong stations on FT8. For example -- if a station i
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00208.html (8,736 bytes)

12. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 17:11:33 -0600
Yesterday I said " I don't have a measurement with the results of that showdown of CW versus FT8 in dead band conditions but the answer would be interesting to know." This afternoon I tried to get an
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00216.html (10,667 bytes)

13. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 12:31:52 -0600
Still doing FT8 testing this morning 3 hours after sunrise I looked for something resembling dead band conditions with only a few weak stations. There was nothing on 160 but the west coast guys were
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00229.html (13,806 bytes)

14. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: "James M. Roop" <k9se@6mdx.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 13:27:00 -0500
Jerry, If you would like to do some mid-day comparison testing between FT8 and CW, let me know. Looks like the path length is about 400 miles. Jim, K9SE _________________ Searchable Archives: http://
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00230.html (7,881 bytes)

15. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioXX@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 14:10:09 -0600
Although I have finished my FT8 testing, there is one final thought I would like to leave with you, and also to correct one statement I made earlier. Someone thought FT8 measured the noise in the int
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00253.html (13,085 bytes)

16. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 15:17:37 -0600
I think I understand much of what you are saying, but I know that I was on 160 meter FT=8 two nights ago with the speaker up fairly loud. I only heard noise. I set the AGC off and adjusted the RF gai
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00254.html (13,342 bytes)

17. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Eugene Popov /RA0FF/ via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2018 01:42:28 +0300
Hi, we use 4ports-RX-splitter https://www.ebay.com/itm/4-WAY-HF-ANTENNA-SPLITTER-COMBINER-RX-0-1-50-MHz-SO-239-connectors/322564884873?hash=item4b1a5d8989:g:JJ4AAOxyM89Sbujo:rk:1:pf:0   73! de Eugene
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00255.html (15,333 bytes)

18. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Tim Shoppa <tshoppa@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:24:16 -0500
Chuck, I suspect something wasnt quite right with your setup? At my QTH in W3 I can hear multiple FT8 signals on 1840kc USB (2.4khz bandwidth) from before my sunset until after sunrise. They are whin
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00256.html (15,386 bytes)

19. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: "JC" <n4is@n4is.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 18:45:34 -0500
Jerry The new mode FT8 is not all that new, actually, there are several aspects to consider, like detect the signal, decode the signal detected, make a decision to accept the decoded signal. The impr
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00257.html (16,777 bytes)

20. Re: Topband: FT8 - How it really works (score: 1)
Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2018 12:05:57 -0600
Ok, ok. I said it wrong. When I think of 160, I say night, It was about 4:00 pm local time. Chuck W5PR _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
/archives//html/Topband/2018-12/msg00265.html (19,178 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu